Just poking my nose in here, this is a cool draft. I say, go for it. Depending on implementation, it may address the very problem I was attempting to solve with NERD: that first dropped packet.
I have one small suggestion and a question: The suggestion: It would be useful to discuss what statistics should be kept when experimenting. Specifically: number of subscribes (prior to or after the first time one saw an EID), the number of map updates over time (I’m betting there’s a lot of stability out there, but that’s just me), number of subscribers. The question: How would an xTR UNsubscribe from mapping notifications? I would imagine this would amount to a new map request that clears the N bit for appropriate EID-Records? Eliot > On 13 Jan 2021, at 08:19, Luigi Iannone <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi All, > > The authors of draft-ietf-lisp-pubsub submitted a new version addressing the > issues raised during SECDIR review. > The document seems mature and stable and authors are asking for formal WG > Last Call. > > This email open the usual two weeks Working Group Last Call, to end January > 28th, 2021. > > Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it is > ready to be handed over to the AD. > If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what it > would take to address your concerns. > > NOTE: silence IS NOT consensus! > > Thanks > > Luigi & Joel > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
